First snow, VERY disappointed

[mwiener2]

I know noone likes the RE-92 that much but come on, the list of expectations for this tire are hilarious...

 

It should stick like an UHP summer tire on dry tarmac

It should stick like a rain-biased tire in the wet

It should deal with snow like an UHP all-season tire

It should be silent and wear like a touring tire

It should add nothing to the purchase price of the vehicle

It should fulfill Subaru's needs for availability and zero warranty claims

 

Any other feature requests?

 

My current all seasons do all of that, but I still swap on winters.

[StoplightAssassin]

I know noone likes the RE-92 that much but come on, the list of expectations for this tire are hilarious...

 

It should stick like an UHP summer tire on dry tarmac

It should stick like a rain-biased tire in the wet

It should deal with snow like an UHP all-season tire

It should be silent and wear like a touring tire

It should add nothing to the purchase price of the vehicle

It should fulfill Subaru's needs for availability and zero warranty claims

 

Any other feature requests?

 

Uh yeah...how about they don't cost $285 each.

[Bbc84]

Uh yeah...how about they don't cost $285 each.

 

 

yea for a High Performance All Season @ $285 each I expected a lot better.

[sjwelna]

Add one to the RE-92's SUCK in snow pool. I couldn't get traction trying to drive up my driveway after stopping waiting for the door to open with about 2-3" on the ground. My driveway has about a 2' rise over about 30' to the street (very shallow slope). I was feathering it and it would just immediately spin. Got some Dunlop wintersport 3D's now it rules in the snow. Tires make all the difference.

 

-Steve

[ssbtech]

Let's look at the tread here:

 

It's largely a wide flat surface. There are no channels assisting the evacuation of water and sluch from the contact patch to the outside of the tire. This helps the tire float above the slush and water. This leads to sliding and hydroplaning.

 

Minimal siping on the tread blocks prevents any flexing of the tread blocks and reduces stopping capabilities on low traction surfaces.

 

Rounded shoulders also allow the tires to rise up and over snow and slush, this leads to very little lateral stability in all but dry conditions.

 

 

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii287/bac52/5e54e148.jpg

 

 

 

Now if you look at a proper winter tire...

 

Not only doesn't the rubber turn into a hockey puck in the cold air, the tread directs slush and water out away from the contact patch, lots of siping allows flexability in the tread blocks and helps to cut through the snow and slush. The sharp shoulders help to prevent the tires from sliding sideways in the snow and the "teeth" at the front edge of the shoulder tread blocks assist in stopping in snow, slush and ice.

 

 

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4149/5076730972_8dc5eae704.jpg

 

The only people who claim that the RE92s are a "scapegoat" either haven't driven on a proper set of winter tires or believe that they're god's gift to driving.

[ShadowImg]

The only people who claim that the RE92s are a "scapegoat" either haven't driven on a proper set of winter tires or believe that they're god's gift to driving.

 

I claim they're a scapegoat.

 

I have proper winter tires, and have driven on many. On the Legacy I've used Blizzak LM-25, WS60, and Continental ExtremeWinterContacts, as well as the stock RE92s. On my RS I've got RE960 A/S (AS which do surprisingly well in snow/slush), and a backup of some very tall 195/65R15 Winterforces, and have also used RE92s there.

 

I'm not a very good driver. Average at best.

 

I've never almost crashed into things because of the RE92s, including in conditions of ice, slush, and >6" of fresh snow. I did a couple of times almost lose it because of things *I* did while on the RE92s. I have never gotten stuck or ended up off of the road while on RE92s.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Correction, because I just remembered. I did one time get stuck while on RE92s pulling out of my driveway after a particularly deep snow that had some rain mixed in. The plows came through and built up a much larger plow drift at the end of my driveway than I realized. While backing out, I hit it at pretty good force, ripped the rear splashguards off, and high centered the car on the plow drift. This was indeed while I was still on RE92s.

 

I dug the car out in the center and drove off on the RE92s.

[BAC5.2]

I'm not saying the RE92 is a winter tire. I'm saying it's a great all-season.

 

People who say they suck, expect UHPAS performance out of an HPAS. Notice how every single reply in this thread from someone saying the RE92 sucks, is suggesting replacement with Conti or Michelin Ultra-High-Performance-Tires as a more appropriate tire?

 

No wonder people say it sucks .

 

The RE92 is a scapegoat that people use to mask their own mistakes, errors or over-expectations.

 

The Honda Civic sucks too, when you expect Corvette performance out of it.

[ssbtech]

I made a turn at about 5 MPH in half an inch of fresh snow with the RE92s. The car fishtailed all over the place and was next to impossible to bring back under control.

 

I don't expect ultra high performance from them.

 

I also had a few scary hydroplaning incidents with them and wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary.

 

There is not ONE design element built into the RE92 that makes it suitable for the snow or even heavy rain.

 

They're a shit all-season tire and you know it.

[BAC5.2]

I made a turn at about 5 MPH in half an inch of fresh snow with the RE92s. The car fishtailed all over the place and was next to impossible to bring back under control.

 

I don't expect ultra high performance from them.

 

I also had a few scary hydroplaning incidents with them and wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary.

 

They're a shit all-season tire and you know it.

 

I disagree. They carried my 400whp first-gen through winter without any issues or "impossible to regain control" fish tail incidents at 5mph. I also never had any scary hydroplaning incidents in any of the cars I've had those tires on.

 

Seriously. The car fishtailed uncontrollably at 5mph in a half inch of snow, and you really think the TIRE is at fault?

[ShadowImg]

fishtailing uncontrollably at 5mph is no great feat, I can do it in dry weather on good tires, it's called standing on the gas pedal and letting torque at the wheels do the rest.

 

It's actually a little more difficult at 25mph than 5mph.

 

Story holds no conclusion about tires.

[BAC5.2]

^^ except one: Scapegoat.

[ssbtech]

Story holds no conclusion about tires.

 

When the tires fail to dig in and instead ride up and over snow that was shallower than the tread depth and allow the whole car to slide sideways, what else can you blame?

 

There's only so much I can do as a driver if I don't have any traction available. As I said before, show me just ONE component of these tires that is designed to provide traction in snow.

[ShadowImg]

Well, the microsiping that you're referring to being missing from the RE92 and on the Hakka R is generally there for ice traction, not snow. As far as what is there that is designed to provide traction in snow, all the grooves? Also the rubber compound that remains compliant below freezing temperatures.

 

You'll notice the RE92 doesn't have solid outer blocks, but rather fairly heavily grooved outer tread blocks, very much designed to improve grip in wet conditions. The tread depth new is >8/32nds, allowing for enough tread to have some dig to it.

 

I'm sorry, what exactly are you hoping for here? Tell me, which of these tread patterns are more similar?

 

 

http://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/bridgestone/bs_potenza_re11_ci1_l.jpghttp://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/bridgestone/bs_potenza_re92_ci1_l.jpghttp://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/bridgestone/bs_blizzak_lm25_ci1_l.jpg

[BAC5.2]

When the tires fail to dig in and instead ride up and over snow that was shallower than the tread depth and allow the whole car to slide sideways, what else can you blame?

 

There's only so much I can do as a driver if I don't have any traction available. As I said before, show me just ONE component of these tires that is designed to provide traction in snow.

 

You can blame the driver.

 

Why on earth would you hit the gas like that when turning in the snow? Other than to say "look, these tires suck". I can get the same result with my Pilot Sports, or any winter tire you give me.

 

The circumfrential grooves are beneficial in evacuation of snow and water. Even the Pilot Sport, and the Continental DWS have them. And at full tread depth (up to ~20k) they have shallow sipes to improve snow traction. They are NOT a snow tire, or a UHPAS tire.

[ssbtech]

I also never had any scary hydroplaning incidents in any of the cars I've had those tires on.

 

You must be a driving god.

 

I remember taking off from a stop on a freeway at average acceleration rate, hitting a puddle and having the car pull to within 5" of the concrete barrier.

[ssbtech]

Well, the microsiping that you're referring to being missing from the RE92 and on the Hakka R is generally there for ice traction, not snow. As far as what is there that is designed to provide traction in snow, all the grooves? Also the rubber compound that remains compliant below freezing temperatures.

 

 

 

Seeing how ice is a major component of winter driving, I'd prefer to have the additional siping to assist in the displacement of water that forms over the ice.

[ssbtech]

You can blame the driver.

 

Why on earth would you hit the gas like that when turning in the snow? Other than to say "look, these tires suck". I can get the same result with my Pilot Sports, or any winter tire you give me.

 

Who said I hit the gas while turning in the snow. I kept steady on the throttle to reduce weight shift through the turn. If the tires can't contribute to lateral stability on snow that is shallower than their own tread depth, then I'm sorry but the responsibility can't rest with the driver. Unless of course you count the responsibility to properly equip the car for such conditions.

 

 

You're also forgetting one important aspect of the debate - it's one thing to look ahead, slow down, plan your turns, brake early, etc... so that you're not overdriving the capabilities of the tires when you go to take a turn, but it's another thing to not have adequate traction to deal with unexpected situations.

 

 

When I turn the steering wheel, I want the car to turn and not have the side of the tires simply ride up and over the snow.

[ShadowImg]

Seeing how ice is a major component of winter driving, I'd prefer to have the additional siping to assist in the displacement of water that forms over the ice.

 

I would too. But it's not suddenly going to make you going flying off the road. You can still drive without it.

 

Also, to critique your driving. If you're accelerating at an average rate as you first describe, and maintaining consistent throttle to minimize weight shift, that means you took the turn with the weight shifted to the rear of the car. It's not surprising that the front tires might slip while trying to turn in under those conditions. You should be braking or lifting prior to the turn, transferring weight to the front, and then avoiding transferring weight to the rear during the turn until you are through to the apex. In slippery conditions, you need to even be careful getting back on the throttle at the apex, as it may either break the grip you have or end up sending you into oversteer.

 

I'll give you the same advice my dad gave me before the first time I ever drove in snow: Pretend there are eggs until every pedal you have, and drive like you're avoiding breaking them. You'll do fine.

 

Avoiding weight transfer is the right thing to do -- but only if you have the weight transferred to the right place first!

[BAC5.2]

You must be a driving god.

 

I remember taking off from a stop on a freeway at average acceleration rate, hitting a puddle and having the car pull to within 5" of the concrete barrier.

 

It doesn't take any special knowledge to avoid puddles while driving. Are you kidding?

[Berzerklo]

So you are saying I should replace my RE092's with 28k miles on them like last week?

 

Time to hit up tire rack...

[BAC5.2]

I got a nail in a stock tire at 32k and swapped to Pilot Sports. Beyond 30k, the RE92 becomes much more a 3-season tire.

[ssbtech]

It doesn't take any special knowledge to avoid puddles while driving. Are you kidding?

 

Except when it is the middle of the night, pouring rain, and there are cars to your right and a concrete barrier to your left.

 

I shouldn't have to slalom around puddles on the freeway to compensate for the tire's shortcomings.

[BAC5.2]

Then you should slow down. Again, it's not a UHPAS tire.

 

Im all for replacing the stock tires, don't get me wrong, but the RE92 is undeserving of the title "suck"

 

It's a great tire, when driven within its limits. Over expect, and of course you will be disappointed.

[SurlyOldManMN]

I stand behind my comments, and the statement that RE92's are one of the most fun tires you can drive. They slide when you want, and are easy to break loose at relatively low speeds.

 

Am I reading too much into this or did you just claim you like these tires because they're low-traction even at low speed?

 

That is not a desirable tire characteristic for winter use...

 

 

I refuse to call a tire or any other consumer product "great" when it underperforms compared to the competition. That would be reserved for the competition. If I expect something to suck and I turn out to be right, that doesn't mean it was "great". If I expect it to stack up to the competition and I turn out to be wrong, it's not on me to lower expectations to accommodate the underperforming product. The problem is not that it's great and I just need to lower my standards and/or forget that there are much better products available. I'm not following you here.

 

 

I have no idea how these tires are. I'm just having a hard time understanding the argument.

[BAC5.2]

Yea, at low tread and with judicious throttle you can break them free easily if you over drove them. That make them fun. They slide when you want them too.

 

In the category of HPAS tires, the RE92 is a good tire. There are better tires in the UHPAS class, but that's an apples-to-oranges argument.

 

You can't compare the Conti or a Pilot Sport to the RE92.

 

Again, the RE92 is not a winter tire. It's an all-season. It works well for an all-season in the snow.

 

The people who say it sucks are comparing it to tires outside of it's class or blaming their poor driving on the tire.

 

You can't blame a Civic for not performing like a Corvette.